The Making of a Covenant in Dan.9:27

[Quasar92]

What is it that "he" will do? The antichrist will "make a firm covenant with the many for one week," that is seven years. Non-literal interpreters of Daniel’s seventy-week prophecy usually attempt to make this covenant a reference to Christ’s covenant to save His people, usually known as the covenant of grace. "This, then, is a confirming of a covenant already extant, i.e., the covenant of God’s redemptive grace that Christ confirms (Rom. 15:8)," claims Dr. Gentry. Dr. Gentry and those advocating a similar view, must resort to a non-textual, theological interpretation at this point since there was no seven-year covenant made by Christ with the Jewish people at the time of His first coming. They must back off from the specifics of the text in verse 27 and import in a theological interpretation, thus providing us with a classic example of spiritualization or allegorical interpretation.

If this is supposed to be a reference to the covenant of grace, then "it may be observed first that this would be a strange way to express such a thought," notes Dr. Wood. Christ’s salvation covenant is not limited to seven years rather it is an eternal covenant. Daniel 9:27 says the covenant is to be made with "the many." This term always refers in some way to Israel throughout the book of Daniel (Daniel 11:33, 39; 12:3). Thus it is a narrow term, used in a specific context. It is not a broad term, synonymous with the language of global salvation. Further, "it is evident that the covenant is subsequent to the cutting off of Messiah and the destruction of the City and the Sanctuary, in the twenty-sixth verse; therefore, it could not have been confirmed at the First Advent," says G. H. Pember. Such an interpretation does not fit this text and it does not account for the seven years that Gabriel says this covenant will be in place. Dr. Wood further explains:

Since a covenant as described in verse 27 has not yet taken place in reference to the nation of Israel, it must therefore follow that this will be a yet to occur future event. This then, demands a postponement of the seventieth week with a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of years.

This passage clearly says that the length of the covenant that "he" will make will be for one week or seven years. I suppose that this could mean either that the covenant will be predetermined to last seven years or that it does not specify a length of time when made, but as it turns out, is only in existence for seven years. Many of those who believe that the entire prophecy of the seventy weeks has already been fulfilled around the time of Christ’s first coming teach that the first half of the seventieth week was fulfilled by Christ’s ministry. "We know Christ’s three-and-one-half-year ministry," says Dr. Gentry, "was decidedly focused on the Jews in the first half of the seventieth week (Matt. 10:5b; cf. Matt. 15:24)." G. H. Pember objects to such a view with the following:

Once again we have seen in this installment on the seventy weeks that the text of this passage supports a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks. It is becoming increasingly obvious that the seventieth week is still future to the time in which we now live. "Israel has now been reestablished as a nation (1948), suggesting that the seventieth seven may soon begin."

By: Thomas Ice, PhD.


Quasar92

 

[jgr]

What is it that "he" will do? The antichrist will "make a firm covenant with the many for one week," that is seven years. Non-literal interpreters of Daniel’s seventy-week prophecy usually attempt to make this covenant a reference to Christ’s covenant to save His people, usually known as the covenant of grace. "This, then, is a confirming of a covenant already extant, i.e., the covenant of God’s redemptive grace that Christ confirms (Rom. 15:8)," claims Dr. Gentry. Dr. Gentry and those advocating a similar view, must resort to a non-textual, theological interpretation at this point since there was no seven-year covenant made by Christ with the Jewish people at the time of His first coming. They must back off from the specifics of the text in verse 27 and import in a theological interpretation, thus providing us with a classic example of spiritualization or allegorical interpretation.

If this is supposed to be a reference to the covenant of grace, then "it may be observed first that this would be a strange way to express such a thought," notes Dr. Wood. Christ’s salvation covenant is not limited to seven years rather it is an eternal covenant. Daniel 9:27 says the covenant is to be made with "the many." This term always refers in some way to Israel throughout the book of Daniel (Daniel 11:33, 39; 12:3). Thus it is a narrow term, used in a specific context. It is not a broad term, synonymous with the language of global salvation. Further, "it is evident that the covenant is subsequent to the cutting off of Messiah and the destruction of the City and the Sanctuary, in the twenty-sixth verse; therefore, it could not have been confirmed at the First Advent," says G. H. Pember. Such an interpretation does not fit this text and it does not account for the seven years that Gabriel says this covenant will be in place. Dr. Wood further explains:

Since a covenant as described in verse 27 has not yet taken place in reference to the nation of Israel, it must therefore follow that this will be a yet to occur future event. This then, demands a postponement of the seventieth week with a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of years.

This passage clearly says that the length of the covenant that "he" will make will be for one week or seven years. I suppose that this could mean either that the covenant will be predetermined to last seven years or that it does not specify a length of time when made, but as it turns out, is only in existence for seven years. Many of those who believe that the entire prophecy of the seventy weeks has already been fulfilled around the time of Christ’s first coming teach that the first half of the seventieth week was fulfilled by Christ’s ministry. "We know Christ’s three-and-one-half-year ministry," says Dr. Gentry, "was decidedly focused on the Jews in the first half of the seventieth week (Matt. 10:5b; cf. Matt. 15:24)." G. H. Pember objects to such a view with the following:

Once again we have seen in this installment on the seventy weeks that the text of this passage supports a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks. It is becoming increasingly obvious that the seventieth week is still future to the time in which we now live. "Israel has now been reestablished as a nation (1948), suggesting that the seventieth seven may soon begin."

By: Thomas Ice, PhD.


Quasar92

Hebrew Interlinear:

1396 [e]
wə·hiḡ·bîr
וְהִגְבִּ֥יר
And he shall confirm
Verb

◄ 1396. gabar ►
Strong's Concordance
gabar: to be strong, mighty
Original Word: גָּבַר
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: gabar
Phonetic Spelling: (gaw-bar')
Short Definition: prevailed

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
exceed, confirm, be great, be mighty, prevail, put to more strength, strengthen, be stronger,
A primitive root; to be strong; by implication, to prevail, act insolently -- exceed, confirm, be great, be mighty, prevail, put to more (strength), strengthen, be stronger, be valiant.

 

[BABerean2]

What is it that "he" will do? The antichrist will "make a firm covenant with the many for one week," that is seven years. Non-literal interpreters of Daniel’s seventy-week prophecy usually attempt to make this covenant a reference to Christ’s covenant to save His people, usually known as the covenant of grace. "This, then, is a confirming of a covenant already extant, i.e., the covenant of God’s redemptive grace that Christ confirms (Rom. 15:8)," claims Dr. Gentry. Dr. Gentry and those advocating a similar view, must resort to a non-textual, theological interpretation at this point since there was no seven-year covenant made by Christ with the Jewish people at the time of His first coming. They must back off from the specifics of the text in verse 27 and import in a theological interpretation, thus providing us with a classic example of spiritualization or allegorical interpretation.

If this is supposed to be a reference to the covenant of grace, then "it may be observed first that this would be a strange way to express such a thought," notes Dr. Wood. Christ’s salvation covenant is not limited to seven years rather it is an eternal covenant. Daniel 9:27 says the covenant is to be made with "the many." This term always refers in some way to Israel throughout the book of Daniel (Daniel 11:33, 39; 12:3). Thus it is a narrow term, used in a specific context. It is not a broad term, synonymous with the language of global salvation. Further, "it is evident that the covenant is subsequent to the cutting off of Messiah and the destruction of the City and the Sanctuary, in the twenty-sixth verse; therefore, it could not have been confirmed at the First Advent," says G. H. Pember. Such an interpretation does not fit this text and it does not account for the seven years that Gabriel says this covenant will be in place. Dr. Wood further explains:

Since a covenant as described in verse 27 has not yet taken place in reference to the nation of Israel, it must therefore follow that this will be a yet to occur future event. This then, demands a postponement of the seventieth week with a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of years.

This passage clearly says that the length of the covenant that "he" will make will be for one week or seven years. I suppose that this could mean either that the covenant will be predetermined to last seven years or that it does not specify a length of time when made, but as it turns out, is only in existence for seven years. Many of those who believe that the entire prophecy of the seventy weeks has already been fulfilled around the time of Christ’s first coming teach that the first half of the seventieth week was fulfilled by Christ’s ministry. "We know Christ’s three-and-one-half-year ministry," says Dr. Gentry, "was decidedly focused on the Jews in the first half of the seventieth week (Matt. 10:5b; cf. Matt. 15:24)." G. H. Pember objects to such a view with the following:

Once again we have seen in this installment on the seventy weeks that the text of this passage supports a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks. It is becoming increasingly obvious that the seventieth week is still future to the time in which we now live. "Israel has now been reestablished as a nation (1948), suggesting that the seventieth seven may soon begin."

By: Thomas Ice, PhD.


Quasar92

From the 1599 Geneva Bible, which is the Bible the Pilgrims brought to America

Daniel 9:27

And he (a) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to (b) cease, (c) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

(a) By the preaching of the Gospel he affirmed his promise, first to the Jews, and after to the Gentiles.

(b) Christ accomplished this by his death and resurrection.

(c) Meaning that Jerusalem and the sanctuary would be utterly destroyed because of their rebellion against God, and their idolatry: or as some read, that the plague will be so great, that they will all be astonished at them.


...................................................................

Dan 9:24　 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.　



Act 10:38　 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.　

Heb 10:16　 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;　
Heb 10:17　 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.　
Heb 10:18　 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.　



Did Christ command that the Gospel be taken first to Daniel's people, the Jews, before it was taken to the Gentiles?

Can anyone prove this period of time was not at least 7 years long, before it was taken to the Gentiles?

................................................................

Gal 1:16　 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:　
Gal 1:17　 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.　
Gal 1:18　 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.　

.

 

[GUANO]

The Scholars mentioned above seem to think that Daniel knew the meaning of the prophecy and spent a lot of time working on how to word it so that we would understand. That assumption is laughable.

In regards to the '7 years', we know that the 'midst' is the middle... IE: 3.5 years, which is how long Christ ministered before he was 'cut off'. But he continued to minister afterwards for at least the 40 days but we know he also appeared to John. The 'desolation' spoken of here has nothing to do with the temple or the 'Abomination that Maketh Desolate'.

Let's also explain away the argument about "the many", obviously being a symbol for "the elect"... How could Jesus confirm a covenant with the entire 'elect', from 33 AD to 2017 from within a single, 7-year time period? Easy! When I read my Bible, I time-travel to 33 AD and become one of the people sitting on the mount of olives listening to him speak and declare the new covenant.

 

[Quasar92]

From the 1599 Geneva Bible, which is the Bible the Pilgrims brought to America

Daniel 9:27

And he (a) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to (b) cease, (c) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

(a) By the preaching of the Gospel he affirmed his promise, first to the Jews, and after to the Gentiles.

(b) Christ accomplished this by his death and resurrection.

(c) Meaning that Jerusalem and the sanctuary would be utterly destroyed because of their rebellion against God, and their idolatry: or as some read, that the plague will be so great, that they will all be astonished at them.


...................................................................

Dan 9:24　 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.　



Act 10:38　 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.　

Heb 10:16　 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;　
Heb 10:17　 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.　
Heb 10:18　 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.　



Did Christ command that the Gospel be taken first to Daniel's people, the Jews, before it was taken to the Gentiles?

Can anyone prove this period of time was not at least 7 years long, before it was taken to the Gentiles?

................................................................

Gal 1:16　 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:　
Gal 1:17　 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.　
Gal 1:18　 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.　

.

The first English translations of the Bible were:

The first eight English translations of the Bible are as follows: Wycliffe Bible (1384); Tyndale Bible (1526); Coverdale Bible (1535); Cranmer Bible (1539); Breeches Bible (1576); Beza Bible (1583); Geneva Bible (1608) and the King James Bible (1611).

show me the source of your information that the Pilgrims brought the Geneva Bible with them to America, and that none of the other seven ever reached our shores at that time. When most of them came from England, where the KJV was predominant.

If this is supposed to be a reference to the covenant of grace, then "it may be observed first that this would be a strange way to express such a thought," notes Dr. Wood. Christ’s salvation covenant is not limited to seven years rather it is an eternal covenant. Daniel 9:27 says the covenant is to be made with "the many." This term always refers in some way to Israel throughout the book of Daniel (Daniel 11:33, 39; 12:3). Thus it is a narrow term, used in a specific context. It is not a broad term, synonymous with the language of global salvation. Further, "it is evident that the covenant is subsequent to the cutting off of Messiah and the destruction of the City and the Sanctuary, in the twenty-sixth verse; therefore, it could not have been confirmed at the First Advent," says G. H. Pember. Such an interpretation does not fit this text and it does not account for the seven years that Gabriel says this covenant will be in place. Dr. Wood further explains:

Since a covenant as described in verse 27 has not yet taken place in reference to the nation of Israel, it must therefore follow that this will be a yet to occur future event. This then, demands a postponement of the seventieth week with a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of years.

The covenant in Dan.9:27 will be confirmed by the Antichrist, who is all three of the "he's" in that verse, not by Jesus!


Quasar92
















DG

 

[BABerean2]

The first English translations of the Bible were:

The first eight English translations of the Bible are as follows: Wycliffe Bible (1384); Tyndale Bible (1526); Coverdale Bible (1535); Cranmer Bible (1539); Breeches Bible (1576); Beza Bible (1583); Geneva Bible (1608) and the King James Bible (1611).

show me the source of your information that the Pilgrims brought the Geneva Bible with them to America, and that none of the other seven ever reached our shores at that time. When most of them came from England, where the KJV was predominant.

If this is supposed to be a reference to the covenant of grace, then "it may be observed first that this would be a strange way to express such a thought," notes Dr. Wood. Christ’s salvation covenant is not limited to seven years rather it is an eternal covenant. Daniel 9:27 says the covenant is to be made with "the many." This term always refers in some way to Israel throughout the book of Daniel (Daniel 11:33, 39; 12:3). Thus it is a narrow term, used in a specific context. It is not a broad term, synonymous with the language of global salvation. Further, "it is evident that the covenant is subsequent to the cutting off of Messiah and the destruction of the City and the Sanctuary, in the twenty-sixth verse; therefore, it could not have been confirmed at the First Advent," says G. H. Pember. Such an interpretation does not fit this text and it does not account for the seven years that Gabriel says this covenant will be in place. Dr. Wood further explains:

Since a covenant as described in verse 27 has not yet taken place in reference to the nation of Israel, it must therefore follow that this will be a yet to occur future event. This then, demands a postponement of the seventieth week with a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of years.

The covenant in Dan.9:7 will be confirmed by the Antichrist, who is all three of the "he's" in that verse, not by Jesus!


Quasar92
















DG

You will find your answer in the link below.

The 1599 Geneva Bible


"King James's Authorized Replacement
Recognizing that the Geneva Bible and its notes were undermining the authority of the monarchy, King James I of England commissioned the "Authorized Version," commonly known as the King James Bible, as its replacement. The King James Version did not include any of the inflammatory footnotes, of course, but it also altered key translations to make them seem more favorable to episcopal and monarchial forms of government.
But the people were not fooled. The Pilgrims and Puritans preferred the Geneva Bible over the King James Bible, not trusting the king's purported good faith. The Geneva Bible was brought over on the Mayflower, and it is not an exaggeration to say that the Geneva translation and footnotes were the biblical foundation for the American Republic."

........................................................................

Those who produced the notes of the 1599 Geneva Bible recognized that Acts 10:38 and Hebrews 10:16-18 prove that Christ fulfilled Daniel 9:24, during the first century.

They also knew that the word "he" is a singular pronoun.
There are only two antecedents in Daniel 9 that could fit.
It would either be Christ, or prince Titus, since the word "people" is not a singular pronoun.


Get you a copy and read the notes. You might learn something.
........................................................................

Who Confirmed The Covenant?
James Lloyd
http://christianmediaresearch.com/node/1023

.

 

[jgr]

The first English translations of the Bible were:

The first eight English translations of the Bible are as follows: Wycliffe Bible (1384); Tyndale Bible (1526); Coverdale Bible (1535); Cranmer Bible (1539); Breeches Bible (1576); Beza Bible (1583); Geneva Bible (1608) and the King James Bible (1611).

show me the source of your information that the Pilgrims brought the Geneva Bible with them to America, and that none of the other seven ever reached our shores at that time. When most of them came from England, where the KJV was predominant.

If this is supposed to be a reference to the covenant of grace, then "it may be observed first that this would be a strange way to express such a thought," notes Dr. Wood. Christ’s salvation covenant is not limited to seven years rather it is an eternal covenant. Daniel 9:27 says the covenant is to be made with "the many." This term always refers in some way to Israel throughout the book of Daniel (Daniel 11:33, 39; 12:3). Thus it is a narrow term, used in a specific context. It is not a broad term, synonymous with the language of global salvation. Further, "it is evident that the covenant is subsequent to the cutting off of Messiah and the destruction of the City and the Sanctuary, in the twenty-sixth verse; therefore, it could not have been confirmed at the First Advent," says G. H. Pember. Such an interpretation does not fit this text and it does not account for the seven years that Gabriel says this covenant will be in place. Dr. Wood further explains:

Since a covenant as described in verse 27 has not yet taken place in reference to the nation of Israel, it must therefore follow that this will be a yet to occur future event. This then, demands a postponement of the seventieth week with a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of years.

The covenant in Dan.9:7 will be confirmed by the Antichrist, who is all three of the "he's" in that verse, not by Jesus!


Quasar92
DG

Hebrew Interlinear:

1396 [e]
wə·hiḡ·bîr
וְהִגְבִּ֥יר
And he shall confirm
Verb

◄ 1396. gabar ►
Strong's Concordance
gabar: to be strong, mighty
Original Word: גָּבַר
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: gabar
Phonetic Spelling: (gaw-bar')
Short Definition: prevailed

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
exceed, confirm, be great, be mighty, prevail, put to more strength, strengthen, be stronger,
A primitive root; to be strong; by implication, to prevail, act insolently -- exceed, confirm, be great, be mighty, prevail, put to more (strength), strengthen, be stronger, be valiant.


Christ confirmed an already existing, new, better, eternal covenant.

Matthew 26:28
for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.

Hebrews 8:6
But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.

Hebrews 9:15
For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

Hebrews 12:24
and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel.

Hebrews 13:20
Now the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, even Jesus our Lord

The covenant in Dan.9:7 will be confirmed by the Antichrist, who is all three of the "he's" in that verse, not by Jesus!

What already existing, new, better, eternal covenant will antichrist confirm?

 

[Quasar92]

You will find your answer in the link below.

The 1599 Geneva Bible


"King James's Authorized Replacement
Recognizing that the Geneva Bible and its notes were undermining the authority of the monarchy, King James I of England commissioned the "Authorized Version," commonly known as the King James Bible, as its replacement. The King James Version did not include any of the inflammatory footnotes, of course, but it also altered key translations to make them seem more favorable to episcopal and monarchial forms of government.
But the people were not fooled. The Pilgrims and Puritans preferred the Geneva Bible over the King James Bible, not trusting the king's purported good faith. The Geneva Bible was brought over on the Mayflower, and it is not an exaggeration to say that the Geneva translation and footnotes were the biblical foundation for the American Republic."

........................................................................

Those who produced the notes of the 1599 Geneva Bible recognized that Acts 10:38 and Hebrews 10:16-18 prove that Christ fulfilled Daniel 9:24, during the first century.

They also knew that the word "he" is a singular pronoun.
There are only two antecedents in Daniel 9 that could fit.
It would either be Christ, or prince Titus, since the word "people" is not a singular pronoun.


Get you a copy and read the notes. You might learn something.
........................................................................

Who Confirmed The Covenant?
James Lloyd
http://christianmediaresearch.com/node/1023

.

Who is the “He” in Daniel 9:27?

Although many say the “he” in Daniel 9:27 represents Jesus Christ, we can scripturally prove that it refers to the Antichrist. The last masculine noun in Daniel 9:26 is “the prince that shall come,” not the Messiah. The prince that shall come is the “he” of Daniel 9:27 and refers to the Antichrist. This becomes clearer when we read what this “he” does. We read that he causes the sacrifice to cease and the abomination of desolation. Jesus did not cause sacrifices to cease but rather He was the ultimate sacrifice. People could still make a sacrifice after the death of Jesus Christ. Jesus’ death took away God’s acceptance of animal sacrifices; it did not decree that animal sacrifices could no longer be made. Jesus also did not commit the abomination of desolation. We have conclusive proof that the Antichrist does both of these things in Daniel 8:11-13 and Daniel 11:31. So it is conclusive that the “he” in Daniel 9:27 is the Antichrist.

(1) ANTICHRIST: Applying the accepted rule of interpretation and observing the text for the nearest antecedent of the pronoun he (without bias or influence by other "experts"), this he most closely parallels the prince who is to come in the previous passage (Daniel 9:26). This is the conclusion reached by most conservative evangelical commentaries, who go on to identify him as the Little Horn (Antichrist) who "came up among the (10) horns" of the fourth beast (fourth kingdom ~ "Revived Rome") chapter 7 of Daniel (Da 7:8,11-note Da 7:20, 21-note).

It is interesting that both Christ and Antichrist are referred to as "prince" (synonymous with "king"), for the prefix "anti-" means the regal imposter is not only opposed to or against Christ, but "instead of" or a substitute for the real Christ.

We know that the prince's people (Rome) destroyed Jerusalem in 70 A.D., and can deduce that this coming prince has his ancestral roots in the ancient Roman Empire and is thus part of what is often referred to as "the revived Roman Empire", the final Gentile world government described in Romans 7 (see Da 7:7-note, Da 7:19-note). In the Revelation of Jesus Christ, John records this vision...

And he stood on the sand of the seashore. And I saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns and seven heads, and on his horns were ten diadems ("ten king stage" of the beast in Da 7), and on his heads were blasphemous names. 2 And the beast which I saw was like a leopard, and his feet were like those of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion (Ed: Note how this is the reverse of the sequence of same beasts in Da 7:1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6-note - John is looking back in time and sees the leopard first = Greece, bear = Medo-Persia, Lion = Babylon). And the dragon (Satan) gave him (Antichrist) his power and his throne and great authority. (Notice how the term "beast" merges subtlety from a beastly kingdom to the king of that kingdom in the latter part of the verse) (Re 13:1-note; Re 13:2-note; see also study of The Beast; and Beasts, Heads, and Horns)

(2) CHRIST: Some such as Edward Young and Phillip Mauro interpret the "He" as a reference to the Messiah primarily because the entire prophecy is about the Messiah and the premise that there is no (to use their words) "future 'prince' making a covenant with" Israel. This interpretation makes little sense because the new covenant in His blood is an everlasting covenant, not a seven year covenant and not a covenant which He will ever break. God is a covenant keeping God! How can the reference be to Christ when we have just been introduced to the prince who is to come which describes one out of the Roman empire? Christ did not come from the Roman Empire but from Israel. Furthermore, when did Christ make a firm covenant with many Jews for one week (seven year period)? And how can it be said of Christ that “in the midst of the week” He caused the sacrifices to cease? Sacrifices continued in the Temple some 40 years after Messiah was cut off, well past the 7 years of the 70th Week. Clearly, the "he" is not Christ.

Harry Ironside agrees that "He" is not the Messiah writing...

Ere closing I briefly notice a rather peculiar interpretation which is frequently given to the 27th verse. It is said that the Lord Jesus is Himself to be the prince that shall come who confirms the covenant for one week. His own crucifixion is supposed to be the event which caused the sacrifice and oblation to cease. But neither chronologically nor doctrinally will this stand for a moment, if examined in the light of other scriptures. With whom did the Lord Jesus ever confirm a covenant for seven years? His precious blood is called ”the blood of the everlasting covenant;” not a covenant for one week of years. We may rest assured it is not Messiah at all, but the blasphemous prince who is yet to come, who will fulfil what is predicted in this verse.

How near this world may be to the actual entering upon all these things no man can say, but it is the part of wisdom to learn from the prophetic Scriptures, and to turn now to Him who alone can save; to own Him as Redeemer and Lord, and thus be certain of being caught up to meet Him when He comes in the clouds, ere the time comes for His righteous judgment to be poured out upon this poor world. (Daniel - H A Ironside)


Quasar92

 

[BABerean2]

Who is the “He” in Daniel 9:27?

Although many say the “he” in Daniel 9:27 represents Jesus Christ, we can scripturally prove that it refers to the Antichrist. The last masculine noun in Daniel 9:26 is “the prince that shall come,” not the Messiah. The prince that shall come is the “he” of Daniel 9:27 and refers to the Antichrist. This becomes clearer when we read what this “he” does. We read that he causes the sacrifice to cease and the abomination of desolation. Jesus did not cause sacrifices to cease but rather He was the ultimate sacrifice. People could still make a sacrifice after the death of Jesus Christ. Jesus’ death took away God’s acceptance of animal sacrifices; it did not decree that animal sacrifices could no longer be made. Jesus also did not commit the abomination of desolation. We have conclusive proof that the Antichrist does both of these things in Daniel 8:11-13 and Daniel 11:31. So it is conclusive that the “he” in Daniel 9:27 is the Antichrist.

You can try to ignore the historical events of 167 BC, which occurred during the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. However, the Jewish historian Josephus clearly documented these facts.

You can also try to ignore John 10:22 if you like. However, the festival of Hanukkah continues to this day.

Next you have to ignore the destruction of the temple by the forces of prince Titus, during 70 AD.

You seem to be saying above that animal sacrifices can still be made even though they are not accepted by God. I am still trying to understand your logic in that one...

Then you must assume that even though the New Covenant had already been promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and Christ is the New Covenant Messiah, somehow the angel Gabriel "forgot" to mention the New Covenant.

And the greatest error is the claim that God will go back and deal with modern Israel under the now "obsolete" Old Covenant (Hebrews 8:13), even though the New Covenant is "everlasting" (Hebrews 13:20).

.

 

[jgr]

The covenant in Dan.9:27 will be confirmed by the Antichrist, who is all three of the "he's" in that verse, not by Jesus!

Hebrew Interlinear:

1396 [e]
wə·hiḡ·bîr
וְהִגְבִּ֥יר
And he shall confirm
Verb

◄ 1396. gabar ►
Strong's Concordance
gabar: to be strong, mighty
Original Word: גָּבַר
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: gabar
Phonetic Spelling: (gaw-bar')
Short Definition: prevailed

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
exceed, confirm, be great, be mighty, prevail, put to more strength, strengthen, be stronger,
A primitive root; to be strong; by implication, to prevail, act insolently -- exceed, confirm, be great, be mighty, prevail, put to more (strength), strengthen, be stronger, be valiant.


Christ confirmed an already existing, new, better, eternal covenant.

Matthew 26:28
for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.

Hebrews 8:6
But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.

Hebrews 9:15
For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

Hebrews 12:24
and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel.

Hebrews 13:20
Now the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, even Jesus our Lord



What already existing, new, better, eternal covenant will antichrist confirm?

Still waiting.

Would the delay possibly be due to agonizing about how to explain the inadvertent substitution of the historic correctly-translated word "confirm" for the modern dispensationally-mistranslated word "make"?

Just wonderin'.

 

[Quasar92]

You can try to ignore the historical events of 167 BC, which occurred during the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. However, the Jewish historian Josephus clearly documented these facts.

You can also try to ignore John 10:22 if you like. However, the festival of Hanukkah continues to this day.

Next you have to ignore the destruction of the temple by the forces of prince Titus, during 70 AD.

You seem to be saying above that animal sacrifices can still be made even though they are not accepted by God. I am still trying to understand your logic in that one...

Then you must assume that even though the New Covenant had already been promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and Christ is the New Covenant Messiah, somehow the angel Gabriel "forgot" to mention the New Covenant.

And the greatest error is the claim that God will go back and deal with modern Israel under the now "obsolete" Old Covenant (Hebrews 8:13), even though the New Covenant is "everlasting" (Hebrews 13:20).

.

Your accusations of issues I ignore in your above composition is false. If it was not included in what I previously wrote, it doesn't belong there in the first place

Antiocus Epiphanes is not the "he" who confirms a covenant in Dan.9:27, because he is past history. The "he" who does confirm a covenant, is the man of lawlessness, recorded in 2 Thess.2:4, the beast out of the sea, whom Satan will give his throne, power and great authority to, recorded in Rev.13:1-2. He is the Antichrist, in the events in Dan.9:27 yet to take place.

FYI, the sacrificial system God gave to Israel under the Mosaic Law, was not abrogated by Jesus, but rather, fulfilled. For all those still worshipping God under the Law, the sacrificial system is still valid, when facilities to do so are available once again, as recorded in Ez.40-47 and Zech.14.


Quasar92

 

[jgr]

The "he" who does confirm a covenant, is the man of lawlessness, recorded in 2 Thess.2:4, the beast out of the sea, whom Satan will give his throne, power and great authority to, recorded in Rev.13:1-2. He is the Antichrist, in the events in Dan.9:27 yet to take place.

Martin Luther:

"We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist, against whose deceit and vileness all is permitted for the salvation of souls. Personally I declare that I owe the Pope no other obedience than that to Antichrist."

"Oh, Christ, my Lord, look down upon us and bring upon us thy day of judgment, and destroy the brood of Satan in Rome. There sits the Man, of whom the Apostle Paul wrote (2 Thess. 2:3,4) that he will oppose and exalt himself above all that is called God,—that Man of Sin, that Son of Perdition. What else is papal power but sin and corruption? It leads souls to destruction under thine own name, 0 Lord! . . . I hope the day of judgment is soon to dawn. Things can and will not become worse than they are at this time. The papal see is practicing iniquity to its heights. He suppresses the Law of God and exalts his commandments above the commandments of God."

"Since, however, there are but few who understand the glory of baptism and the happiness of Christian liberty, or who can understand them for the tyranny of the Pope—I for my part will set free my own mind and deliver my conscience, by declaring aloud to the Pope and to all papists, that, unless they shall throw aside all their laws and traditions, and restore liberty to the churches of Christ, and cause that liberty to be taught, they are guilty of the death of all the souls which are perishing in this wretched bondage, and that the papacy is in truth nothing else than the kingdom of Babylon and of very Antichrist. For who is the man of sin and the son of perdition, but he who by his teaching and his ordinances increases the sin and perdition of souls in the Church; while he yet sits in the Church as if he were God? All these conditions have now for many ages been fulfilled by the papal tyranny. It has extinguished faith, darkened the sacraments, crushed the gospel; while it has enjoined and multiplied without end its own laws, which are not only wicked and sacrilegious, but also most unlearned and barbarous."

"Wherefore, wheresoever the substance of the word and sacraments remaineth, there is the holy church, although Antichrist there reign, who (as the Scripture witnesseth) sitteth not in a stable of fiends, or in a swine-sty, or in a company of infidels, but in the highest and holiest place of all, namely in the temple of God."

 

[Quasar92]

Martin Luther:

"We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist, against whose deceit and vileness all is permitted for the salvation of souls. Personally I declare that I owe the Pope no other obedience than that to Antichrist."

"Oh, Christ, my Lord, look down upon us and bring upon us thy day of judgment, and destroy the brood of Satan in Rome. There sits the Man, of whom the Apostle Paul wrote (2 Thess. 2:3,4) that he will oppose and exalt himself above all that is called God,—that Man of Sin, that Son of Perdition. What else is papal power but sin and corruption? It leads souls to destruction under thine own name, 0 Lord! . . . I hope the day of judgment is soon to dawn. Things can and will not become worse than they are at this time. The papal see is practicing iniquity to its heights. He suppresses the Law of God and exalts his commandments above the commandments of God."

"Since, however, there are but few who understand the glory of baptism and the happiness of Christian liberty, or who can understand them for the tyranny of the Pope—I for my part will set free my own mind and deliver my conscience, by declaring aloud to the Pope and to all papists, that, unless they shall throw aside all their laws and traditions, and restore liberty to the churches of Christ, and cause that liberty to be taught, they are guilty of the death of all the souls which are perishing in this wretched bondage, and that the papacy is in truth nothing else than the kingdom of Babylon and of very Antichrist. For who is the man of sin and the son of perdition, but he who by his teaching and his ordinances increases the sin and perdition of souls in the Church; while he yet sits in the Church as if he were God? All these conditions have now for many ages been fulfilled by the papal tyranny. It has extinguished faith, darkened the sacraments, crushed the gospel; while it has enjoined and multiplied without end its own laws, which are not only wicked and sacrilegious, but also most unlearned and barbarous."

"Wherefore, wheresoever the substance of the word and sacraments remaineth, there is the holy church, although Antichrist there reign, who (as the Scripture witnesseth) sitteth not in a stable of fiends, or in a swine-sty, or in a company of infidels, but in the highest and holiest place of all, namely in the temple of God."

Martin Luther:

"We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist, against whose deceit and vileness all is permitted for the salvation of souls. Personally I declare that I owe the Pope no other obedience than that to Antichrist."

"Oh, Christ, my Lord, look down upon us and bring upon us thy day of judgment, and destroy the brood of Satan in Rome. There sits the Man, of whom the Apostle Paul wrote (2 Thess. 2:3,4) that he will oppose and exalt himself above all that is called God,—that Man of Sin, that Son of Perdition. What else is papal power but sin and corruption? It leads souls to destruction under thine own name, 0 Lord! . . . I hope the day of judgment is soon to dawn. Things can and will not become worse than they are at this time. The papal see is practicing iniquity to its heights. He suppresses the Law of God and exalts his commandments above the commandments of God."

"Since, however, there are but few who understand the glory of baptism and the happiness of Christian liberty, or who can understand them for the tyranny of the Pope—I for my part will set free my own mind and deliver my conscience, by declaring aloud to the Pope and to all papists, that, unless they shall throw aside all their laws and traditions, and restore liberty to the churches of Christ, and cause that liberty to be taught, they are guilty of the death of all the souls which are perishing in this wretched bondage, and that the papacy is in truth nothing else than the kingdom of Babylon and of very Antichrist. For who is the man of sin and the son of perdition, but he who by his teaching and his ordinances increases the sin and perdition of souls in the Church; while he yet sits in the Church as if he were God? All these conditions have now for many ages been fulfilled by the papal tyranny. It has extinguished faith, darkened the sacraments, crushed the gospel; while it has enjoined and multiplied without end its own laws, which are not only wicked and sacrilegious, but also most unlearned and barbarous."

"Wherefore, wheresoever the substance of the word and sacraments remaineth, there is the holy church, although Antichrist there reign, who (as the Scripture witnesseth) sitteth not in a stable of fiends, or in a swine-sty, or in a company of infidels, but in the highest and holiest place of all, namely in the temple of God."

Martin Luther:

"We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist, against whose deceit and vileness all is permitted for the salvation of souls. Personally I declare that I owe the Pope no other obedience than that to Antichrist."

"Oh, Christ, my Lord, look down upon us and bring upon us thy day of judgment, and destroy the brood of Satan in Rome. There sits the Man, of whom the Apostle Paul wrote (2 Thess. 2:3,4) that he will oppose and exalt himself above all that is called God,—that Man of Sin, that Son of Perdition. What else is papal power but sin and corruption? It leads souls to destruction under thine own name, 0 Lord! . . . I hope the day of judgment is soon to dawn. Things can and will not become worse than they are at this time. The papal see is practicing iniquity to its heights. He suppresses the Law of God and exalts his commandments above the commandments of God."

"Since, however, there are but few who understand the glory of baptism and the happiness of Christian liberty, or who can understand them for the tyranny of the Pope—I for my part will set free my own mind and deliver my conscience, by declaring aloud to the Pope and to all papists, that, unless they shall throw aside all their laws and traditions, and restore liberty to the churches of Christ, and cause that liberty to be taught, they are guilty of the death of all the souls which are perishing in this wretched bondage, and that the papacy is in truth nothing else than the kingdom of Babylon and of very Antichrist. For who is the man of sin and the son of perdition, but he who by his teaching and his ordinances increases the sin and perdition of souls in the Church; while he yet sits in the Church as if he were God? All these conditions have now for many ages been fulfilled by the papal tyranny. It has extinguished faith, darkened the sacraments, crushed the gospel; while it has enjoined and multiplied without end its own laws, which are not only wicked and sacrilegious, but also most unlearned and barbarous."

"Wherefore, wheresoever the substance of the word and sacraments remaineth, there is the holy church, although Antichrist there reign, who (as the Scripture witnesseth) sitteth not in a stable of fiends, or in a swine-sty, or in a company of infidels, but in the highest and holiest place of all, namely in the temple of God."

As recorded in Rev.17, the mother of all prostitutes, is the world false religion, who sits in many waters/regions, all over the world. Who will be in existence during the coming tribulation, after the Church has been raptured. Both Catholicism and Islam fit this ID. However, neither of them possess the leader, including the Pope, who will become the Antichrist. Because it will be the beast/Antichrist and the ten horns/nations allied to him, who will kill her off, as recorded in the following:

Rev.17:5 "Then the angel said to me, “The waters you saw, where the prostitute sits, are peoples, multitudes, nations and languages. 16 The beast and the ten horns you saw will hate the prostitute. They will bring her to ruin and leave her naked; they will eat her flesh and burn her with fire. 17 For God has put it into their hearts to accomplish his purpose by agreeing to hand over to the beast their royal authority, until God’s words are fulfilled. 18 The woman you saw is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth.”


Quasar92

 

[jgr]

However, neither of them possess the leader, including the Pope, who will become the Antichrist.

According to Luther, the pope was already the Antichrist.

 

[Quasar92]

According to Luther, the pope was already the Antichrist.

In whom the Word of God disagrees with on various issues,such as in my post #13 above.


Quasar92

 

[jgr]

In whom the Word of God disagrees with on various issues,such as in my post #13 above.


Quasar92

You and I are literally here today because he disagreed with the Word of God?

 

[Quasar92]

You and I are literally here today because he disagreed with the Word of God?

And that has a relevance to what?


Quasar92

 

[BABerean2]

For all those still worshipping God under the Law, the sacrificial system is still valid, when facilities to do so are available once again, as recorded in Ez.40-47 and Zech.14.

The ministry of death written on stones (2 Corinthians 3:6-8) is finished, "obsolete".

Anyone who makes animal sacrifices now or in the future will be making a mockery of the work of God's Son, on the Cross.



Gal 4:21　 Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law?　
Gal 4:22　 For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman.　
Gal 4:23　 But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise,　
Gal 4:24　 which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar—　
Gal 4:25　 for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children—　
Gal 4:26　 but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all.　
Gal 4:27　 For it is written: "REJOICE, O BARREN, YOU WHO DO NOT BEAR! BREAK FORTH AND SHOUT, YOU WHO ARE NOT IN LABOR! FOR THE DESOLATE HAS MANY MORE CHILDREN THAN SHE WHO HAS A HUSBAND."　
Gal 4:28　 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise.　
Gal 4:29　 But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now.　
Gal 4:30　 Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? "CAST OUT THE BONDWOMAN AND HER SON, FOR THE SON OF THE BONDWOMAN SHALL NOT BE HEIR WITH THE SON OF THE FREEWOMAN."　
Gal 4:31　 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free.　


Gal 5:1　 Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage.　
Gal 5:2　 Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing.　
Gal 5:3　 And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law.　
Gal 5:4　 You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.　


Jesus, High Priest of a Better Covenant

Heb 8:1　 Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens,　
Heb 8:2　 a Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected, and not man.　
Heb 8:3　 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. Therefore it is necessary that this One also have something to offer.　
Heb 8:4　 For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest, since there are priests who offer the gifts according to the law;　
Heb 8:5　 who serve the copy and shadow of the heavenly things, as Moses was divinely instructed when he was about to make the tabernacle. For He said, "SEE THAT YOU MAKE ALL THINGS ACCORDING TO THE PATTERN SHOWN YOU ON THE MOUNTAIN."　
Heb 8:6　 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.　
Heb 8:7　 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.　
Heb 8:8　 Because finding fault with them, He says: "BEHOLD, THE DAYS ARE COMING, SAYS THE LORD, WHEN I WILL MAKE A NEW COVENANT WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND WITH THE HOUSE OF JUDAH— (Copied from Jeremiah 31.)　
Heb 8:9　 NOT ACCORDING TO THE COVENANT THAT I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS IN THE DAY WHEN I TOOK THEM BY THE HAND TO LEAD THEM OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT; BECAUSE THEY DID NOT CONTINUE IN MY COVENANT, AND I DISREGARDED THEM, SAYS THE LORD.　
Heb 8:10　 FOR THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS IN THEIR MIND AND WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS; AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.　
Heb 8:11　 NONE OF THEM SHALL TEACH HIS NEIGHBOR, AND NONE HIS BROTHER, SAYING, 'KNOW THE LORD,' FOR ALL SHALL KNOW ME, FROM THE LEAST OF THEM TO THE GREATEST OF THEM.　
Heb 8:12　 FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR UNRIGHTEOUSNESS, AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."　
Heb 8:13　 In that He says, "A NEW COVENANT," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.　

.

 

[Quasar92]

The ministry of death written on stones (2 Corinthians 3:6-8) is finished, "obsolete".

Anyone who makes animal sacrifices now or in the future will be making a mockery of the work of God's Son, on the Cross.



Gal 4:21　 Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law?　
Gal 4:22　 For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman.　
Gal 4:23　 But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise,　
Gal 4:24　 which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar—　
Gal 4:25　 for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children—　
Gal 4:26　 but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all.　
Gal 4:27　 For it is written: "REJOICE, O BARREN, YOU WHO DO NOT BEAR! BREAK FORTH AND SHOUT, YOU WHO ARE NOT IN LABOR! FOR THE DESOLATE HAS MANY MORE CHILDREN THAN SHE WHO HAS A HUSBAND."　
Gal 4:28　 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise.　
Gal 4:29　 But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now.　
Gal 4:30　 Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? "CAST OUT THE BONDWOMAN AND HER SON, FOR THE SON OF THE BONDWOMAN SHALL NOT BE HEIR WITH THE SON OF THE FREEWOMAN."　
Gal 4:31　 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free.　


Gal 5:1　 Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage.　
Gal 5:2　 Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing.　
Gal 5:3　 And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law.　
Gal 5:4　 You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.　


Jesus, High Priest of a Better Covenant

Heb 8:1　 Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens,　
Heb 8:2　 a Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected, and not man.　
Heb 8:3　 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. Therefore it is necessary that this One also have something to offer.　
Heb 8:4　 For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest, since there are priests who offer the gifts according to the law;　
Heb 8:5　 who serve the copy and shadow of the heavenly things, as Moses was divinely instructed when he was about to make the tabernacle. For He said, "SEE THAT YOU MAKE ALL THINGS ACCORDING TO THE PATTERN SHOWN YOU ON THE MOUNTAIN."　
Heb 8:6　 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.　
Heb 8:7　 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.　
Heb 8:8　 Because finding fault with them, He says: "BEHOLD, THE DAYS ARE COMING, SAYS THE LORD, WHEN I WILL MAKE A NEW COVENANT WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND WITH THE HOUSE OF JUDAH— (Copied from Jeremiah 31.)　
Heb 8:9　 NOT ACCORDING TO THE COVENANT THAT I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS IN THE DAY WHEN I TOOK THEM BY THE HAND TO LEAD THEM OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT; BECAUSE THEY DID NOT CONTINUE IN MY COVENANT, AND I DISREGARDED THEM, SAYS THE LORD.　
Heb 8:10　 FOR THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS IN THEIR MIND AND WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS; AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.　
Heb 8:11　 NONE OF THEM SHALL TEACH HIS NEIGHBOR, AND NONE HIS BROTHER, SAYING, 'KNOW THE LORD,' FOR ALL SHALL KNOW ME, FROM THE LEAST OF THEM TO THE GREATEST OF THEM.　
Heb 8:12　 FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR UNRIGHTEOUSNESS, AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."　
Heb 8:13　 In that He says, "A NEW COVENANT," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.　

.

More interpretation based on personal opinion that contradicts Scriptural facts to the contrary. Explain why Jesus is going to build a new Millennial temple, described in Ez.40-47, with many priests to provide the service for it, recorded in Rev.20:6 and in Zech.14.


Quasar92

 

[BABerean2]

More interpretation based on personal opinion that contradicts Scriptural facts to the contrary. Explain why Jesus is going to build a new Millennial temple, described in Ez.40-47, with many priests to provide the service for it, recorded in Rev.20:6 and in Zech.14.


Quasar92

1Pe 2:9　 But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light;　
1Pe 2:10　 who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy.
(In this passage Peter is speaking to the Church.)
　

Heb_10:6　 IN BURNT OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES FOR SIN YOU HAD NO PLEASURE.


Heb_10:8　 Previously saying, "SACRIFICE AND OFFERING, BURNT OFFERINGS, AND OFFERINGS FOR SIN YOU DID NOT DESIRE, NOR HAD PLEASURE IN THEM" (which are offered according to the law),



Joh 4:20　 Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, and you Jews say that in Jerusalem is the place where one ought to worship."　
Joh 4:21　 Jesus said to her, "Woman, believe Me, the hour is coming when you will neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, worship the Father.　
Joh 4:22　 You worship what you do not know; we know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews.　
Joh 4:23　 But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him.　
Joh 4:24　 God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth."



We have not come to Mount Sinai, but to the New Covenant of Mount Zion, instead.

Heb 12:18　 For you have not come to the mountain that may be touched and that burned with fire, and to blackness and darkness and tempest,　

Heb 12:19　 and the sound of a trumpet and the voice of words, so that those who heard it begged that the word should not be spoken to them anymore.　

Heb 12:20　 (For they could not endure what was commanded: "AND IF SO MUCH AS A BEAST TOUCHES THE MOUNTAIN, IT SHALL BE STONED OR SHOT WITH AN ARROW."　

Heb 12:21　 And so terrifying was the sight that Moses said, "I AM EXCEEDINGLY AFRAID AND TREMBLING.")　


Heb 12:22　 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels,　

Heb 12:23　 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect,　

Heb 12:24　 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.　



What is the difference between what you are claiming and the doctrine of the Judaisers, who refused to let go of the Old Covenant?　

.